Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

This area is for discussions that do not fit into the formal firearms discussions of the website. Common sense and non-controversial contributions are expected. Certain topics are forbidden. See the forum rules for more details.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by DontTreadOnMe »

TJW815 wrote:DTOM, the anti's make a strikingly similar argument. If we didn't sell any guns then nobody would get shot...
I never said that. I'm saying if we put a bunch of guns into the marketplace that don't have firing pin blocks or another feature to prevent the guns from going off when dropped, and they go to consumers who aren't aware of the problem, then more consumers are going to have NDs and that's bad for everybody.
TJW815 wrote:Sometimes your just have to stop protecting people from themselves and let Darwin win.

No matter the gun, if you try hard enough you can make it discharge in a manner not recommended.
You don't have to make it easy. 150 or so years ago when people carried revolvers w/o firing pin blocks it was common to not load them with a round in front of the firing pin. Apparently 150 years ago people were smarter and had a lot more sense than we do now.
User avatar
deanimator
Posts: 7863
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:34 pm
Location: Rocky River

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by deanimator »

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
deanimator wrote:
DontTreadOnMe wrote:It's not drop safe.
Then don't drop it.
Brilliant, why didn't everyone who's ever dropped a gun think of that? :roll:
I wonder the same thing.

I also wonder why people think that mechanical devices can overcome human stupidity.

A loaded firearm is a dangerous object. If you refuse to treat it with respect, you're going to have problems, regardless of how you screw up the trigger pull.

Your "argument" is remarkably like that of antis who [not wanting to tip their hand regarding outright bans], demand all sorts of useless or impossible things, like magazine safeties and "safe" guns.

If you're stupid and careless enough, you'll find a way to kill yourself with a "gun" cut from a cleaning sponge.
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by DontTreadOnMe »

deanimator wrote:I also wonder why people think that mechanical devices can overcome human stupidity
Because they can. Not all the time, but some of the time. Welcome to reality.
deanimator wrote:Your "argument" is remarkably like that of antis who [not wanting to tip their hand regarding outright bans], demand all sorts of useless or impossible things, like magazine safeties and "safe" guns.
Please tell me what it is I've "demanded", or for that matter even requested? Heck I haven't even outright said the program shouldn't happen - I just expressed a concern about a possible (IMO likely) result of the program. Cue the hair pulling and teeth gnashing.

What I did was express a safety concern. I believe legitimate but some others think not. If this is a common response of pro-gunners when safety concerns are raised (ignoring it or trying to shut it down by attacking the person vs. the argument), it's not surprising that anti's currently "own" the "safety" conversation.
User avatar
deanimator
Posts: 7863
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:34 pm
Location: Rocky River

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by deanimator »

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
deanimator wrote:I also wonder why people think that mechanical devices can overcome human stupidity
Because they can. Not all the time, but some of the time. Welcome to reality.
How'd that work at Chernobyl?
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
User avatar
Werz
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 5506
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:37 am

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by Werz »

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
deanimator wrote:I also wonder why people think that mechanical devices can overcome human stupidity
Because they can. Not all the time, but some of the time. Welcome to reality.
I understand your concern, but if we cave in one thing, the Chicken Littles will go on to the next. Were three-wheel ATVs sufficiently unsafe to ban their manufacture and import? Well, I've had the rear wheel come off the ground on a sharp turn, and it will scare the hell out of you. But what about the four-wheelers? In the medical community, ATV riders are still referred to as "organ donors." Dangerous instrumentalities are what they are; it's just a matter of degree. Due care is the key because the risk will always exist.

Maybe I should bring my Ballester-Rigaud to the next OFCC event. It doesn't even have a grip safety. Folks will be running in every direction.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by DontTreadOnMe »

deanimator wrote:
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
deanimator wrote:I also wonder why people think that mechanical devices can overcome human stupidity
Because they can. Not all the time, but some of the time. Welcome to reality.
How'd that work at Chernobyl?
(a) Re-read the highlighted part.
(b) You're supporting my point. Chernobyl happened because of design flaws, exacerbated by human error. In response changes were made to both the training and design. People didn't just say "well the human beings shouldn't have made X mistake so there's no need to alter the design". Future reactors of the same type incorporated the design changes (I'd provide a link to greater detail, but since you didn't read those 9 words I highlighted above there's no chance you'll read an extensive description of the reactor design flaw & responses).

Am I saying John Moses Browning's 1911 has a design flaw? Any consideration of that has to include it's intended use. From what I've read of the development it was always intended as a military weapon. So no, it wasn't (as far as I'm aware) designed with any concept that it would be used as a daily carry weapon for civilians.

According to http://www.browning.com/library/infonew ... asp?ID=301" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; the grip safety and lanyard ring were added due to concerns raised by cavalrymen. Based on that it's clear he was willing to re-consider safety features based on application. Then again he was a visionary. It's probably easier to cling to long held beliefs and be unwilling to challenge them.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by DontTreadOnMe »

Werz wrote:I understand your concern, but if we cave in one thing, the Chicken Littles will go on to the next.
That's always a possibility and not an invalid concern. Does that mean we have to always agree with every pro-gun idea or proposition? Is it wrong to criticize Kory Watkins of Open Carry Tarrant County?

Worse, does it mean we can't even discuss whether X is a good idea or not? That seems awfully dangerous to me.

As I posted above, JMB was willing to add safety features to his gun when new applications - with different safety concerns - were pointed out. Why is it wrong for us to even discuss such things?
Tweed Ring
Posts: 17812
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:15 am

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by Tweed Ring »

I would buy one as it's a part of history.
User avatar
deanimator
Posts: 7863
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:34 pm
Location: Rocky River

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by deanimator »

DontTreadOnMe wrote:Chernobyl happened because of design flaws, exacerbated by human error.
No, Chernobyl happened because of INTENTIONAL HUMAN ACTION to CIRCUMVENT existing safety mechanisms.

If you cut your OWN brake lines and drive into a bridge abutment going 100mph, that's neither a "design flaw" nor "human error". What you did was STUPID, but you MEANT to do it.
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
mreising
Posts: 6274
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:07 pm
Location: Warren County

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by mreising »

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
mreising wrote:Besides, don't those 1911s have that handle clamp safety thingy?
If you mean the grip safety then yes they do, but that doesn't make them drop safe. It prevents the trigger from moving, it does nothing to prevent discharges due to the firing pin moving forward due to inertia and striking the primer.
Yes, I meant the grip safety and I understand its purpose and function. My posting was more a comment on the linked post. I guess I should have put a winking smiley lest someone misunderstand my post. Still, I have no problems with original 1911A1 design pistols, other than maybe the small sights on the originals. The safety issues are minor in my opinion, which is worth what everyone paid for it.
The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny

Mark
NRA Training Counselor-Rifle, Pistol, Shotgun, Reloading, Personal Protection in the Home, Personal Protection Outside the Home, Home Firearms Safety, Chief RSO. NRA Endowment Life member.
Bama.45
Posts: 3025
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:32 pm
Location: Warren county

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by Bama.45 »

DontTreadOnMe wrote: Am I saying John Moses Browning's 1911 has a design flaw? Any consideration of that has to include it's intended use. From what I've read of the development it was always intended as a military weapon. So no, it wasn't (as far as I'm aware) designed with any concept that it would be used as a daily carry weapon for civilians.

According to http://www.browning.com/library/infonew ... asp?ID=301" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; the grip safety and lanyard ring were added due to concerns raised by cavalrymen. Based on that it's clear he was willing to re-consider safety features based on application. Then again he was a visionary. It's probably easier to cling to long held beliefs and be unwilling to challenge them.


I don't agree with restricting any kind of firearm from civilians that can legally own firearms..I don't see many folks buying AND carrying these weapons daily anyway..How many folks do you see hunting with M1 Garands?..Most realize they're a piece of history and treat them as such..I know I will when I get my Garand..And if they do start selling service 1911, I'll get one of those too..
"Lord, make my hand fast and accurate.
Let my aim be true and my hand faster
than those who would seek to destroy me.
Grant me victory over my foes and those who wish to do harm to me and mine.
Let not my last thought be 'If I only had my gun."
And Lord, if today is truly the day you call me home
Let me die in a pile of empty brass."
Amen




U.S. Marines 01-07



~The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.~ Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by DontTreadOnMe »

deanimator wrote:
DontTreadOnMe wrote:Chernobyl happened because of design flaws, exacerbated by human error.
No, Chernobyl happened because of INTENTIONAL HUMAN ACTION to CIRCUMVENT existing safety mechanisms.
Your info is out-of-date. You're referring to the original report, not the subsequent investigation from '91. The original report was based on information largely controlled by the plant developers. The subsequent report identified 2 major factors in the design (its extremely large positive void coefficient and design flaws with the control rods) neither of which were known to the crew. Human beings cannot safely handle dangerous equipment if they aren't aware of the safety issues or of correct steps to address them.

Some highlights directly from the INSAG-7 report:
The Chernobyl disaster was caused by the choice made by the RBMK-1000 reactor designers of a design which did not take adequate account of the safety issues involved. As a result of that choice, the physical and thermal-hydraulic characteristics of the reactor core contradicted the principles of dynamically stable safe systems.
The possible consequences of operating a reactor with such dangerous characteristics were not indicated in the design, the engineering or, consequently, in the operating documentation.
walnut red
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 7:59 am
Location: Morrow County

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by walnut red »

Great, I hope there is a flood of "1911A1s are not safety to carry" threads after the the DCM has them on hand ready to sell. As someone who has carried a 1911A1, was trained by the Army how to troubleshoot and repair 1911A1s and still has an Ithaca 1911A1 that I bought when the DCM was selling them for $100, I hope there is little interest in any new 1911A1 the DCM gets.
User avatar
Werz
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 5506
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:37 am

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by Werz »

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
Werz wrote:I understand your concern, but if we cave in one thing, the Chicken Littles will go on to the next.
That's always a possibility and not an invalid concern. Does that mean we have to always agree with every pro-gun idea or proposition? Is it wrong to criticize Kory Watkins of Open Carry Tarrant County?

Worse, does it mean we can't even discuss whether X is a good idea or not? That seems awfully dangerous to me.

As I posted above, JMB was willing to add safety features to his gun when new applications - with different safety concerns - were pointed out. Why is it wrong for us to even discuss such things?
It is a good idea to notify people of inherent risks with a specific design, but those risks are not so high as to justify banning civilian sales. "Assumption of risk" is still well recognized in tort law.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
User avatar
Sneakypete
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 709
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:43 pm
Location: NW Ohio Seneca

Re: Would you like to have a Gov. 1911A1?

Post by Sneakypete »

walnut red wrote:Great, I hope there is a flood of "1911A1s are not safety to carry" threads after the the DCM has them on hand ready to sell. As someone who has carried a 1911A1, was trained by the Army how to troubleshoot and repair 1911A1s and still has an Ithaca 1911A1 that I bought when the DCM was selling them for $100, I hope there is little interest in any new 1911A1 the DCM gets.
I also hope there is very little interest in these, as I would like to have a couple. I carried one cocked & locked in an issued shoulder holster for a couple of years in RVN, never had a ND, & never dropped the weapon.
Duty, Honor, Country.
These three hallowed words reverently dictate what you ought to be, what you can be, what you will be.
-Gen Douglas MacArthur

You have never lived until you have almost died.
For those who have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know.
Post Reply